On Mon, Dec 8, 2008 at 5:12 PM, Jeff Spaleta <jspaleta@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, Dec 8, 2008 at 12:38 PM, Patrice Dumas <pertusus@xxxxxxx> wrote: >> This is in order to always have a fallback. Anybody can use anything as >> EDITOR, but one has to have a default. vi is not a bad choice, it is >> POSIX, unless I am not recalling correctly, and it is small. > > > Should all possible fallbacks be hard requirements? Isn't it better to > have a number of competing packages provide an editor and provide a > virtual editor provides, have one of those installed editors set as > the default system editor via the EDITOR variable and then have all > packages which need an editor require the virtual editor provides > instead of a specific editor? > > That way anyone can build a spin or do an install using any > appropriate available editor package which provides the editor virtual > provides as policy and tastes dictate. > > -jef > > -- > fedora-devel-list mailing list > fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list > Hmm, sounds familiar... oh, right, the alternatives man page. It is possible for several programs fulfilling the same or similar functions to be installed on a single system at the same time. For example, many systems have several text editors installed at once. This gives choice to the users of a system, allowing each to use a dif- ferent editor, if desired, but makes it difficult for a program to make a good choice of editor to invoke if the user has not specified a par- ticular preference. The alternatives system aims to solve this problem. jerry -- Store in cool, dry place. Rotate stock. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
